[linux-elitists] RFC 2015 (MIME and PGP) -- RFC status?
Mon Mar 12 15:46:45 PST 2001
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 02:55:27PM -0800, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> I understand your frustration, but please note that RFC2015 is
> only a proposed standard. This is the first step on the standard
> track, so it is not even close to becoming an actual standard.
> It may in fact never become a standard and we do not consider the
> "Translate= Yes" behaviour a "bug." See RFC2026 for more
> information, and specifically section 4.1.1 on proposed standards:
Hmm, I noticed that RFC2015 happens to be by the author of Mutt, which
is the most notable program I know of that prefers PGP-MIME. This sheds
some light for me on why Mutt deprecates plaintext PGP signatures.
Nevertheless, I think PGP-MIME is great and use it when signing mail.
Central "standards" are about as real as DNS in the minds of elitists.
PGP signatures do not belong in the body. MIME works, but I think the
message header would actually be an ideal, out-of-the-way location for
signatures. Signatures tend to be short and are not human-readable, so a
header seems like the perfect place. I don't even think that you would
need to escape characters since signatures need only be "armored" in
base64, which is the most common current practice.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20010312/e0daa7db/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists